Simple question, or... maybe not. Wikipedia's article on the 442 says that for a 1972 442, the package "reverted to an appearance and handling option".

So my question is this: I've seen plenty of so called 72 Vista Cruisers with the 442 badge, some with 350's and some with 455's. I've also seen plenty of 442's with OEM hoods and without. What do I need to do to legitimately call my 72 Vista Cruiser a 72 442 Vista Cruiser?

I sort of figured that maybe since I've upgraded the 350 with a 4bbl edelbrock, aluminum intake, headers, performance hei ignition and all kinds of other goodies, all I really need to do is buy a couple 442 badges and slap em on the grill and fenders and call it a day.

Any ideas/suggestions?

 

Legitimately there's nothing you can do. It never could have come that way.

Figuratively you can do whatever you want

 

x2

 

I like that answer and I'm gonna fly with it.

Thanks!

 

For the 1972 model year, the W29 442 package was only available on four specific models, the Cutlass Holiday Coupe, Cutlass S Sport Coupe, Cutlass S Holiday Coupe, and Cutlass Supreme Convertible.

Note that this list does not include the Vista Cruiser.

If your question really was, what equipment was included in the 1972 W-29 package, it was the 442 grilles, emblems, exterior stripes, and FE2 suspension package.

 

Don't forget the blacked out hood louvers....

Here's the info about W29 from the 1972 SPECS booklet. Joe is absolutely right about the cars it was offered on. It seems that everyone gets the Post coupes wrong on the names though - it was the Sports coupe, not Sport. Cutlass S Hardtop coupe (aka a Holiday coupe) was model G87 and the Cutlass S (aka post) Sports coupe was model G77. Trying to remember all this sometimes is like asking a blind person for directions to McDonald's though.



W29 cars (not W30) are really only identifiable by documentation like a original window sticker, bill of sale, broadcast card or build sheet. Unfortunately a Protecto plate or VIN will not provide W29 documentation in 1972.

BTW Joe, re the W29/W30 discussion we had a while back? I have to admit seeing and understanding your point of view now. I was a little to fixated at the time. Sorry about the frustration it caused.

 

No problem.